Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Neidig v. United States

March 17, 2010

CHARLES NEIDIG, JR. PLAINTIFF
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Magistrate Judge Baxter

MEMORANDUM OPINION*fn1

Mag. J. Susan Paradise Baxter

I. Procedural History

Plaintiff, formerly a prisoner incarcerated at FCI McKean, filed the instant action pro se.*fn2

Plaintiff alleges that unnamed staff at FCI McKean negligently delayed in diagnosing and treating his appendicitis and that the United States of America should be held liable for the medical negligence of its employees under the Federal Tort Claims Act.*fn3 As relief, Plaintiff seeks:

That due to the deliberate indifference buy [sic] the staff at McKean Federal Correctional Institution which resulted in excessive and unnecessary pain and suffering as a result of negligent medical care, which almost resulted in "death." A "sum certain" for compensatory damages is requested in the amount of 1.5 million dollars for negligent medical care resulting in excessive and unnecessary pain and suffering nearly resulting in death.

Document # 5, page 5.

Defendant United States has filed a motion for summary judgment [Document #53] and in support of that motion, Defendant has obtained the expert opinion of Jamie Stern, M.D. [Document # 56-6, 56-7]. Plaintiff has filed a brief in opposition to the pending motion [Document # 59].

Plaintiff has also requested that this Court appoint an expert witness on his behalf.*fn4 By Order dated October 20, 2009, this Court directed that the Clerk of Courts seek counsel on behalf of Plaintiff. Four such requests were made and all four requests were declined. See Documents ## 62, 63, 64, and 65. By Order dated December 18, 2009, I vacated the order directing the appointment of counsel explaining:

This Court only has the power to request representation for civil plaintiffs, unlike criminal cases where counsel may be appointed by the court. If no counsel agrees to take a civil case when requested, an order appointing counsel is appropriately vacated until and if an attorney is found for the case. That is the case here. If Plaintiff finds counsel willing to represent him on his own, he may renew his motion without prejudice. Nonetheless, the case must proceed toward resolution.

As this case is fully briefed, an Opinion on the motion for summary judgment will be issued in due course.

Document # 66.

Since December of 2009, neither party has filed any additional papers in this case. The dispositive motion is fully briefed and is ripe for disposition by this Court.

II. Standards of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.